Well, the way I see it Assassin's Creed basically started off as a reinvention of Prince of Persia gameplay. That's what disappoints me the most about Assassin's Creed. I think the reason Prince of Persia is on hiatus is because it's main competitor would be Assassin's Creed, which now seems to be an annual release.

It's milked but I still like it. Mainly for the historic atmosphere, architecture etc.What I like about this one is that it's set in caribbean and i kinda had a feeling that some day we will have ac there.No body really tried making games in this kind of setting

The last few AC titles have suffered heavily from "feature creep", bogging down the great pacing that they achieved in AC2. Unless AC4 takes the series back in a sleeker direction, I'll be waiting for it to hit the bargain bin.

I'm afraid that the AC franchise is turning into Call of Duty. They're popping out another variation every 6-12 months and it keeps getting slightly "upgraded" (in their eyes) and more watered down compared to the original.

Seriously, the series has been downhill since ACII. I liked ACII because it was the perfect formula. It had just enough of what was fun from the original with just enough "new" features to make the game interesting. With Brotherhood, Revelations, and ACIII they just had to keep adding more "features" that just made the game less fun.

Assassin's Creed has become less about the actual assassination and more about the damned mini-games or doing missions one exacting way. In the first games you could complete a mission and its bonus objectives (if any) an infinite number of ways meaning every person could approach the game however they wanted, be it using pure stealth and taking people out like a ghost (my preferred way) to going balls out and slaughtering every damned guard that crosses your path for the world to see.

Anyway I'll be pretty stunned if this game is actually good. See, it's obviously the case that Ubi has several teams working on several different AC games at once, which explains the frequency, but part of that is to with the fact that they use the same engine over and over again. I wouldn't have a problem with that if there were only like a trilogy of games, but there's much more than that. There's a sense that they churn these games out with minimal effort and because we're not developers, we don't recognise how lazy they are or something. I don't know really.

Hey ubisoft what about prince of Persia,oh wait yeah I remember it ended on a cliffhanger and you pretty much said screw it, to this day theres still no sequel,beyond good and evil 2 in yeah we havnt heard anything since 2008,probably got canceled for more assassians creed games,i swear to god assassians creed is just over milked to the point where the franchise that created it(prince of Persia) is now being put in a dark corner,and im a huge ac fan but im so happy I didnt support 3,this is no different than call of duty its infinite milk.

Despite having a IV on it, not changing much of the location and time frame makes it look a lot like a transition episode just like Brotherhood and Revelations... Well, I thought naval gameplay was the best new feature in the last AC but this doesn't seem very appealing to me...

Ridiculous... Amazing how out of touch these publishers can be. I won't support another AC game until they prove they're going to treat it with some respect. AC3 was incredibly underwhelming. The characters, story, gameplay, protagonist, etc all fell flat. Ubi is being incredibly short-sighted.